- The photos don't cause much harm, I think, but they serve no purpose and should go. I only included them when I wrote these articles a decade ago because it looked better on single article pages; that's not necessary here.
- If we do take the photos out, we might as well delete many of the files. Some are borrowed from the character's real-life analog, but others I uploaded just for the page. A few of those have since had the real-world analogs get articles of their own, and have thus been repurposed; but not many. Turtle Fan (talk) 07:02, October 2, 2017 (UTC)
- Looking at it more closely, the photos are lined-up with the individual Lit. Comms. They may be less disruptive if they are moved up to the individual character name sub-section. As it is now, the pictures are large enough to overlap with the next character. If they were shifted, I think they would be within the particular character section and so less confusing. ML4E (talk) 17:16, October 2, 2017 (UTC)
- The lit comms have to stay, because the puns are a fairly central part of the experience of reading the book. Turtle Fan (talk) 05:26, October 2, 2017 (UTC)
- That being said, it might be more user-friendly (for the Table of Contents purposes mainly) if we did away with the subsection headings and simply added the one-section comments at the bottom of the main section (which in some cases is barely longer than the comment itself). Doing that would shorten the amount of space each section commands, which would make shifting the pictures harder. Turtle Fan (talk) 01:57, October 3, 2017 (UTC)
- I see, remove the subsection for each character title but leave the Lit Comm with it. What confused me was the "added the one-section comments at the bottom of the main section". I was picturing all the character subsections then the Lit. Comms. at the bottom as a separate sub-section. This will work and I agree it will clean up the Table of Contents. ML4E (talk) 17:26, October 10, 2017 (UTC)
I have changed the "Lit. Comm." sub-titles to bolded non-titles. What does everyone think? It does clean up the contents page anyway and seems to be clear enough, to me. ML4E (talk) 19:26, November 9, 2017 (UTC)
George the Bibber
That's George Crittenden. He was charged with drunkeness, his brother Thomas was a Union general, his dad, John Crittenden was a Union politician, and they were all from Kentucky. TR (talk) 17:35, October 7, 2017 (UTC)
- Charged with drunkenness? Then HT should have called him George the BIEBer! Turtle Fan (talk) 19:20, October 7, 2017 (UTC)
- Really? Is it just a spelling variation? That's certainly an amusing coincidence.